Dismissed

Sri Mathew Thomas v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Mar 2022WP/5857/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, at the hearing of a writ petition seeking removal of gates in gated communities, considered an interim application to recall a prior order. Finding no good grounds to recall the order due to non-compliance, the court rejected the application and dismissed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

I.A.1/2022 was rejected; Writ Petition No.5857 of 2021 was dismissed.

Sri Mathew Thomas Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF MARCH, 2022

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.5857 OF 2021 (LB-BMP)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. MATHEW THOMAS S/O LATE T.P.JOHN, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.2, ‘ARISTOS’, SOBHA CITY, THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560 064.

¶11

... PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI NITIN A.M., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶15

BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 002.

¶16

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, CITY GOVERNMENT OFFICE, SANKEY ROAD, NEAR 5^TH MAIN ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST, BENGALURU-560 001

¶17

... RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI VIJAYKUMAR A PATIL, AGA FOR R1)

¶19

¶20

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN DIRECTING THEM TO HAVE ALL GATES IN THE SO-CALLED GATED COMMUNITIES IN BANGALORE TO BE REMOVED AS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC NOTICE DATED 20.05.2008 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 (ANNEXURE-A) AND TO REPORT COMPLETION OF THE SAME TO THIS HON’BLE COURT AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Heard.

¶25

I.A.1/2022 has been filed to recall the order

¶26

dated 25.08.2021. The order dated 25.08.2021 is reproduced below:

¶27

“One last opportunity is granted to apply for amendment.

¶28

Keeping in view the order dated 28.07.2021, four weeks’ time is granted to do the needful failing which the petition shall stand dismissed without reference to this Court.

¶29

List the matter only if the order passed by this Court is complied with on 01.10.2021.”

¶30

The petitioner has failed to move any application for amendment as directed earlier. We do not

¶31

¶32

find any good ground to recall the order dated 25.08.2021.

¶33

Hence, I.A.1/2022 is rejected.

¶34

Writ petition stands dismissed accordingly.

¶35

SD/CHIEF JUSTICE

¶36

SD/JUDGE

¶37

Sri Mathew Thomas v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Mathew Thomas v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Rekhappa L Rathod Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Rekhappa L Rathod Vs State of Karnataka

Murali Krishna Brahmandam Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri E Radhakrishnan Vs Union of India

Aravind B Vs State of Karnataka

Ramesh Naik L Vs the State of Karnataka